Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1887-11-03
THE ANARCHISTS.
Argument on the Motion for Writ
of Error in Progress.
The United States Supreme Court Room at
Washington Crowded with an Inter-
ested Throng Of Lawyers and
Others to Hear the Speeches.

WASHINGTON, Oct z7.-Long before the
hour of the opening of the doors OF the
United States Supreme Court room to-day
large crowd had gathered in the COR
ridors patiently waiting the opening OF
the court room, and an opportunity to
hear the argument in the appeal of the
condemned Chicago Anarchists, which is
to be heard to-day. The court assembled
promptly at noon, and at that time the
dingy and cramped court room was crowd
ed with lawyers and spectators. General
Butler, Roger A. Pryor, Captain Black
and MIR. Solomon, the Anarchists
counsel, sat side by side, with
their law books piled in front
of them, ready, and apparently anxious to
commence tho effort to secure the inter-
ference Of the court in behalf of their
clients, while near them sat Attorney
General Hunt, District Attorney Grinnell
and others representing the State of Illi-
nois, awaiting the commencement of the
attack on the Judgment of the Supreme
Court of their State. Spectators and law
yers were doomed to disappointment,
however, for the court, after admitting
several members to practice, took up an
other case of minor Importance, in which
argument was begun, with fair prospect
of lasting an hour or more.
five minutes past one O'Clock, when Chief
JuStice Waite announced that the court
wB ready to take up the Anarchists
case. At once there was a hush in the
court room, and a moment of almost
breathless silence. General Butler rose
and stated his connection with the case,
that he represented two of the condemned
Anarchists, and that his colleague, John
Randolph Tucker, W as ready to open the
argument in behalf of the petitioners.
Then followed a moments consultation
about the time to be accorded counsel.
Attorney General Hunt of Illinois said
that, not knowing the scope the op-
posing counsel's argument might
take, he could not say how
much time the States council would re-
matter by allowing each side three hours,
and without further delay Mr.. Tucker
rose and began his argument, directing
his efforts to the question of jurisdiction
raised by the appeal for the writ of error.
He did not propose to go over the whole
record of the case and show the grounds
for reversal of the judgment of the Illi-
nois court, but to show that this was q
case within the jurisdiction of the SUI
preme Court, which justified the issuance
of the writ.
The practice of the Supreme Court, he in
sisted, showed that it had not been asked
to fild reasons for not issuing writs of
error, but that it had been diligent in find
ing reasons on which to base their juris-
diction to issue writs. All that was nee
essary to do in this case was to show a
possible conflict between the State and
Federal statutes, and this he proposed to
do, but beyond this the Importance of this
case would warrant the court to issue the
writ giving the plaintiffs the benefit
of the doubt, if there was
any, as to the courts jurisdiction.
Mr.. Tucker closed his argument at half
past two with very eloquent and inn
passioned appeal for Justice for these
men, who, whether Anarchists or not,
were entitled to the cons titutional pro-
lection and intervention which they
sought to obtain for them.
The main contention of counsel for the
Anarchists, as brought out in Roger A.
Pryor's argument before the court the
other day and Mr.. fuckers opening argu-
ment,. is that by the Illinois jury law and
by the action of the Illinois court, the An
archists were convicted of capital Of
Tense without due process of law,
contrary to the guarantees OF
the Fourteenth amendment to the
implies and requires trial by an impair
tial jury; that the Illinois statute makes
competent juror with preconceived
and present opinion as to the guilt of the
accused: that it is not therefore educ pro
cess Of law" which abridses "the privi-
leges or immunities of citizens of the
United States" by denying the accused
s'the right to trial by an impartial jury"
and is therefore unconstitutional.
Attorney General Hunt, of Illinois, in
oral argum emit to- day, opposed the grant
ing of the writ of error and replied to the
points. He insisted that to warrant the
writ it must appear from the records that
there was a Federal question involved,
and that such question was raised and de-
cided in the State court. He denied that
these conditions were met. The record did
not show that any Federal question is in
volved. The prohibitions, he contsnded,
contained in the first ten amendments 70
to the Constitution, are limitations on the
powers of the Federal Government and not
upon the States, and so far as the Anarch-
lists rely upon any thing contained in
standing in the Supreme Court
of the United States. The Fourteenth
anne ndment, he argued, was equally
foreign to any right, privilege or immunity
claimed by the petitioners. That amend-
ment declared that no State shall make or
enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or imnunties of citizens of the
United States, nor shall any State deprive
without due process of law, nor deny to
sfc iI1riC di